CMT-Benchmark: A Benchmark for Condensed Matter Theory Built by Expert Researchers

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.05228v1
• Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2025 18:00:55 GMT
• Title: CMT-Benchmark: A Benchmark for Condensed Matter Theory Built by Expert Researchers
• Abstract summary: We present CMT-Benchmark, a dataset of 50 problems covering condensed theory (CMT) at the level of a researcher.<n>The best model, GPT5, solves 30% of the problems; average across 17 models is 11.4$$%.<n>We believe this benchmark will guide development toward capable AI research assistants and tutors.
• Score: 11.307995773498975
• License: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable progress in coding and math problem-solving, but evaluation on advanced research-level problems in hard sciences remains scarce. To fill this gap, we present CMT-Benchmark, a dataset of 50 problems covering condensed matter theory (CMT) at the level of an expert researcher. Topics span analytical and computational approaches in quantum many-body, and classical statistical mechanics. The dataset was designed and verified by a panel of expert researchers from around the world. We built the dataset through a collaborative environment that challenges the panel to write and refine problems they would want a research assistant to solve, including Hartree-Fock, exact diagonalization, quantum/variational Monte Carlo, density matrix renormalization group (DMRG), quantum/classical statistical mechanics, and model building. We evaluate LLMs by programmatically checking solutions against expert-supplied ground truth. We developed machine-grading, including symbolic handling of non-commuting operators via normal ordering. They generalize across tasks too. Our evaluations show that frontier models struggle with all of the problems in the dataset, highlighting a gap in the physical reasoning skills of current LLMs. Notably, experts identified strategies for creating increasingly difficult problems by interacting with the LLMs and exploiting common failure modes. The best model, GPT5, solves 30\% of the problems; average across 17 models (GPT, Gemini, Claude, DeepSeek, Llama) is 11.4$\pm$2.1\%. Moreover, 18 problems are solved by none of the 17 models, and 26 by at most one. These unsolved problems span Quantum Monte Carlo, Variational Monte Carlo, and DMRG. Answers sometimes violate fundamental symmetries or have unphysical scaling dimensions. We believe this benchmark will guide development toward capable AI research assistants and tutors.

Related papers

• GIM: Evaluating models via tasks that integrate multiple cognitive domains [42.01371688303606]
  Grounded Integration Measure is a benchmark of 820 original problems.<n>Each problem is an original expert-authored composition.<n>A balanced public-private split provides built-in contamination diagnostic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T17:09:50Z)
• RPC-Bench: A Fine-grained Benchmark for Research Paper Comprehension [65.81339691942757]
  RPC-Bench is a large-scale question-answering benchmark built from review-rebuttal exchanges of high-quality computer science papers.<n>We design a fine-grained taxonomy aligned with the scientific research flow to assess models' ability to understand and answer why, what, and how questions in scholarly contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-14T11:37:00Z)
• QueST: Incentivizing LLMs to Generate Difficult Problems [77.75835742350644]
  Large Language Models have achieved strong performance on reasoning tasks, solving competition-level coding and math problems.<n>Existing competitive coding datasets contain only thousands to tens of thousands of problems.<n>We propose QueST, a novel framework which combines difficulty-aware graph sampling and difficulty-aware rejection fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-20T16:29:53Z)
• PRISMM-Bench: A Benchmark of Peer-Review Grounded Multimodal Inconsistencies [16.537126902822127]
  We introduce PRISMM-Bench, the first benchmark grounded in real reviewer-flagged inconsistencies in scientific papers.<n>We design three tasks, namely inconsistency identification, remedy and pair matching, which assess a model's capacity to detect, correct, and reason over inconsistencies.<n>We benchmark 21 leading LMMs, including large openweight models (GLM-4.5V 106B, InternVL3 78B) and proprietary models (Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-5 with high reasoning)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-18T13:46:26Z)
• IMProofBench: Benchmarking AI on Research-Level Mathematical Proof Generation [4.991157581428135]
  IMProofBench is a private benchmark consisting of 39 peer-reviewed problems developed by expert mathematicians.<n>Each problem requires a detailed proof and is paired with subproblems that have final answers.<n>Unlike prior benchmarks, the evaluation setup simulates a realistic research environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-30T10:50:37Z)
• SciML Agents: Write the Solver, Not the Solution [69.5021018644143]
  We introduce two new datasets: a diagnostic dataset of adversarial "misleading" problems; and a large-scale benchmark of 1,000 diverse ODE tasks.<n>We evaluate open- and closed-source LLM models along two axes: (i) unguided versus guided prompting with domain-specific knowledge; and (ii) off-the-shelf versus fine-tuned variants.<n>Preliminary results indicate that careful prompting and fine-tuning can yield a specialized LLM agent capable of reliably solving simple ODE problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-12T02:53:57Z)
• EvolMathEval: Towards Evolvable Benchmarks for Mathematical Reasoning via Evolutionary Testing [45.89558878854675]
  EvolMathEval is an automated mathematical benchmark generation and evolution framework based on evolutionary testing.<n>It can generate a large volume of high-difficulty problems through continuous self-iteration.<n>It can also significantly enhance the complexity of public datasets like GSM8K through evolution, reducing model accuracy by an average of 48%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-18T15:24:10Z)
• Evaluating and Improving Large Language Models for Competitive Program Generation [18.564450345359468]
  This study aims to evaluate and improve large language models (LLMs) in solving real-world competitive programming problems.<n>We collect 117 problems from nine regional ICPC/CCPC contests held in 2024 and design four filtering criteria to construct a curated benchmark consisting of 80 problems.<n>We evaluate its competitive program generation capabilities through the online judge (OJ) platforms, guided by a carefully designed basic prompt.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-28T17:18:23Z)
• Explore Theory of Mind: Program-guided adversarial data generation for theory of mind reasoning [88.68573198200698]
  We introduce ExploreToM, the first framework to allow large-scale generation of diverse and challenging theory of mind data.<n>Our approach leverages an A* search over a custom domain-specific language to produce complex story structures and novel, diverse, yet plausible scenarios.<n>Our evaluation reveals that state-of-the-art LLMs, such as Llama-3.1-70B and GPT-4o, show accuracies as low as 0% and 9% on ExploreToM-generated data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T21:29:00Z)
• Easy2Hard-Bench: Standardized Difficulty Labels for Profiling LLM Performance and Generalization [126.27645170941268]
  We present Easy2Hard-Bench, a collection of 6 benchmark datasets spanning various domains.<n>Each problem within these datasets is annotated with numerical difficulty scores.<n>We provide a comprehensive analysis of their performance and generalization capabilities across varying levels of difficulty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-27T03:49:56Z)
• MathOdyssey: Benchmarking Mathematical Problem-Solving Skills in Large Language Models Using Odyssey Math Data [20.31528845718877]
  Large language models (LLMs) have significantly advanced natural language understanding and demonstrated strong problem-solving abilities. This paper investigates the mathematical problem-solving capabilities of LLMs using the newly developed "MathOdyssey" dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T13:02:35Z)
• MindStar: Enhancing Math Reasoning in Pre-trained LLMs at Inference Time [51.5039731721706]
  MindStar is a purely inference-based searching method for large language models. It formulates reasoning tasks as searching problems and proposes two search ideas to identify the optimal reasoning paths. It significantly enhances the reasoning abilities of open-source models, such as Llama-2-13B and Mistral-7B, and achieves comparable performance to GPT-3.5 and Grok-1.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-25T15:07:33Z)
• Evaluating LLMs' Mathematical and Coding Competency through Ontology-guided Interventions [47.83142414018448]
  We focus on two popular reasoning tasks: arithmetic reasoning and code generation. We introduce (i) a general ontology of perturbations for math and coding questions, (ii) a semi-automatic method to apply these perturbations, and (iii) two datasets. We show a significant performance drop across all the models against perturbed questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T18:13:07Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.